From: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>
To: "Randy.Dunlap" <rddunlap@osdl.org>
Cc: Ed Tomlinson <tomlins@cam.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: {sys_,/dev/}epoll waiting timeout
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 19:34:46 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030122193446.GA5438@bjl1.asuk.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.33L2.0301221112160.3511-100000@dragon.pdx.osdl.net>
Randy.Dunlap wrote:
> | > Why assume HZ=1000? Would not:
> | >
> | > timeout = (unsigned long)(timeout*HZ+(HZ-1))/HZ+1;
> | >
> | > make more sense?
> |
> | No, that's silly. Why do you want to multiply by HZ and then divide by HZ?
>
> OK, I don't get it. All Ed did was replace 1000 with HZ and
> 999 with (HZ-1). What's bad about that? Seems to me like
> the right thing to do. Much more portable.
>
> What if HZ changes? Who's going to audit the kernel for changes?
You're being dense. The input timeout is measured in milliseconds;
see poll(2). The calculated timeout is measured in jiffies. Hence
multiply by jiffies and divide by milliseconds.
-- Jamie
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-01-22 19:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-01-22 6:55 {sys_,/dev/}epoll waiting timeout Lennert Buytenhek
2003-01-22 8:03 ` Jamie Lokier
2003-01-22 12:46 ` Ed Tomlinson
2003-01-22 13:20 ` Jamie Lokier
2003-01-22 19:14 ` Randy.Dunlap
2003-01-22 19:34 ` Jamie Lokier [this message]
2003-01-22 19:32 ` Randy.Dunlap
2003-01-23 14:07 ` Davide Libenzi
2003-01-23 15:43 ` Jamie Lokier
2003-01-23 17:27 ` Mark Mielke
2003-01-23 18:28 ` Jamie Lokier
2003-01-23 20:40 ` Mark Mielke
2003-01-23 22:18 ` Jamie Lokier
2003-01-24 14:41 ` Andreas Schwab
2003-01-25 1:08 ` Davide Libenzi
2003-01-27 21:27 ` bug in select() (was Re: {sys_,/dev/}epoll waiting timeout) Bill Rugolsky Jr.
2003-01-27 22:52 ` Davide Libenzi
2003-01-28 9:45 ` Jamie Lokier
2003-01-28 10:52 ` Mark Mielke
2003-01-28 21:39 ` Jamie Lokier
2003-01-28 22:15 ` Davide Libenzi
2003-01-28 19:42 ` {sys_,/dev/}epoll waiting timeout Randy.Dunlap
2003-01-28 21:36 ` Jamie Lokier
2003-01-28 21:44 ` David Mosberger
[not found] <20030122080322.GB3466@bjl1.asuk.net.suse.lists.linux.kernel>
[not found] ` <Pine.LNX.4.33L2.0301281139570.30636-100000@dragon.pdx.osdl.net.suse.lists.linux.kernel>
[not found] ` <20030128213621.GA29036@bjl1.asuk.net.suse.lists.linux.kernel>
2003-01-28 21:55 ` Andi Kleen
2003-01-28 22:24 ` Davide Libenzi
2003-01-28 22:39 ` Andi Kleen
2003-01-28 23:00 ` Davide Libenzi
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20030122193446.GA5438@bjl1.asuk.net \
--to=jamie@shareable.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rddunlap@osdl.org \
--cc=tomlins@cam.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox